87
87
Sep 28, 2012
09/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 87
favorite 0
quote 0
you may see scalia or kennedy retire if they get president romney. it makes a huge potential shift in the court based on the next president. you could have one, two or even three additional nominees not fallen to retirement but that will give president obama the opportunity to a majority of the members of the supreme court given the previous nominations or it would give the president romney the chance to possibly shift the balance and any one replacing justice kennedy affect the balance to make a solid liberal or so the court assuming the president knows how to pick the right kind of person that they want, which is always a challenge. >> you said retirement's during this term, my prediction would be none. they all seem to be pretty healthy. >> for four years i think they can sit there and think it would be great to have so and so in place but for years is a long time. we will worry about that later. i'm having fun now. >> would you join me on behalf of the federal society thinking that panel. [applause] [inaudible conversations] wisconsin has become
you may see scalia or kennedy retire if they get president romney. it makes a huge potential shift in the court based on the next president. you could have one, two or even three additional nominees not fallen to retirement but that will give president obama the opportunity to a majority of the members of the supreme court given the previous nominations or it would give the president romney the chance to possibly shift the balance and any one replacing justice kennedy affect the balance to make...
97
97
Sep 28, 2012
09/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 97
favorite 0
quote 0
and president romney might well decide that he would defend the constitutionality of the statute, but it does not seem that that kind of social conservative question has a lot of civilians in something like a presidential debate. i think it will, other than health care, i can't see much happening. >> i think it -- i think it will not happen. and here's why. no major national political figure has attacked affirmative-action publicly since 1996 or four. it is kind of remarkable. the republicans to during the 90's for a while we're seeing some political profit in attacking affirmative action given the poll's don't do anymore. the democrats said maybe it's time to stop these racial preferences. the democratic council was inching down that road. but that's all gone. and i have spoken to republican politicians. why is that? and the answer was, we get so demonized if we ever raised voices against affirmative action. it's just not worth the cost, not worth the hassle. i think part of it, ironically, was there was an incredibly bitter campaign in california over proposition 209 which banned ra
and president romney might well decide that he would defend the constitutionality of the statute, but it does not seem that that kind of social conservative question has a lot of civilians in something like a presidential debate. i think it will, other than health care, i can't see much happening. >> i think it -- i think it will not happen. and here's why. no major national political figure has attacked affirmative-action publicly since 1996 or four. it is kind of remarkable. the...
92
92
Sep 27, 2012
09/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 92
favorite 0
quote 0
romney didn't mention it. i think it's the first time for the office of president when we've been at war has not mentioned the ongoing war as part of this, you know, political speech to the american people. so it is very curious. but i think one of the reasons why it's not a bigger issue is that the president is articulated a clear plan. we have 49 other countries plus the afghans that have bought in to that plan. it we have the insurance pots at end in case there is some challenges sober associationed with the plan. and ultimately i think the american people want top see a transition and do want to see the end of decade of war and a end of a decade in tens of thousands of young americans being in harm's way. that coupled with the very successful campaign against al qaeda has significantly reduced the risk that afghanistan poses to our vital interest. i think americans understand where we are, and they're generally supportive of the president's policies in this regard. >> i'd like to just ask a second question
romney didn't mention it. i think it's the first time for the office of president when we've been at war has not mentioned the ongoing war as part of this, you know, political speech to the american people. so it is very curious. but i think one of the reasons why it's not a bigger issue is that the president is articulated a clear plan. we have 49 other countries plus the afghans that have bought in to that plan. it we have the insurance pots at end in case there is some challenges sober...
98
98
Sep 28, 2012
09/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 98
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> looking ahead, after the election, how do you see cybersecurity advancing under a romney administration, and how do you see it advancing under continued obama administration? and what is the government supposed to do, what might happen if they can't get legislation passed? >> i wouldn't put it in a box under each administration. this is an issue that is a significant threat to our nation. is a threat to our financial security. it's a threat to our national security. it's got to be taken seriously regardless of who is in office. ideally what i would like to see is somebody in the white house, in office perhaps, that is responsible for coordinating this across the entire government. as a direct report to the president of the trade. somebody who's got the authority of the president of the united states to make decisions, and to coordinate this across the sectors. there's no single government agency that has the ability, the capacity to respond to this or to work this. people talk about nsa all the time, and general alexander i think is a real patriot is someone who cares about this country
. >> looking ahead, after the election, how do you see cybersecurity advancing under a romney administration, and how do you see it advancing under continued obama administration? and what is the government supposed to do, what might happen if they can't get legislation passed? >> i wouldn't put it in a box under each administration. this is an issue that is a significant threat to our nation. is a threat to our financial security. it's a threat to our national security. it's got to...